Yeah, if only the UK government, the Conservative government from 2010 to 2024 had put money and resources into fighting such a thing, instead decreasing spending on the police.
Police authorities funding allocations 2010 to 2011
Nick Herbert's speech on core government funding to the police for 2010 to 2011www.gov.uk
Here's Lord Herbert (Posh Conservative ****) saying within 21 days of the Conservatives winning the election that: "As a result, I intend to reduce this year’s core Government funding to the police by a total of £125 million."
Yep, one of the first things they did was reduce police spending.
"Even after this reduction, Government funding to the police will still increase by ÂŁ124 million this year to around ÂŁ9.61 billion."
The Labour govt who lost (because of the electoral system and because the Lib Dems are idiots, Labour and the Lib Dems got more votes than the Tories) had planned to increase spending, but the Tories cut that spending increase.
So, in 2010 spending was ÂŁ9.61 billion on the police.
By 2016 it was up to ÂŁ10 billion. So they'd increased spending on the police by ÂŁ0.39 billion.
But, if we go sneaky and use an inflation calculator, ÂŁ9.61 in 2010 is ÂŁ10.82 in 2016, which means the Conservative govt had cut police spending by ÂŁ0.82 billion by 2016.
By 2024 when they were kicked out of office, police spending was ÂŁ11 billion.
With inflation ÂŁ9.61 became ÂŁ14.38, which means they had cut police spending by ÂŁ3.38 billion a year.
And you wonder why grooming didn't get addressed?
And then let's look at the USA
"America’s Grooming gang epidemic — Tens of thousands of girls and children abused every year"
"In recent years the subject of child sexual exploitation has been at the forefront of most news channels in Europe but America has shied away from it, it is something that American networks would rather talk about others problems instead of their own. Reason being? It’s likely America has the worst grooming gang scandal of all time and does not want to confront the problem."
"America does not use the term “grooming” like European nations do, child sexual exploitation falls under the term “sex trafficking”. However, “sex trafficking” does not convey the true nature of the abuse these young girls suffer and also implies they are adults, not children."
"Because of the covert nature of child grooming, reliable estimates of the number of youth affected are lacking. "
This is the difference. The UK is dealing with grooming to a certain extent, it's difficult to deal with because an underaged girls who is sexually active, and is WILLING, and then gets groomed by older men, has a certain freedom problem.
But in the UK people go to court and then to prison. In the US.... well.... let's just talk about the UK's problem because US politicians don't have to give a damn, because there are only two parties.
In the UK more parties has made this a prevalent topic. Mostly because the BNP/ any of their shootoffs and Reform/and their shootoff, have decided it's a good way to "legitimately attack nignogs, wogs, pakis" and other people they hate.
Who cares what they spend if they refuse to go after the rapists.
Sheesh you're stupid.
